ILNews

Abrams: Celebrating Law Day

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

jeff abrams ibaMay 1 is officially recognized as Law Day. The day is spent reflecting on the role of law in the pursuit of happiness in our everyday lives and recognizing the importance of law for our community.

The first president to declare May 1 to be Law Day was President Dwight D. Eisenhower. The same day was recognized around the world as a day to remember the laborers fighting for better wages and working conditions. Law Day has not risen to a government holiday, but it is routinely recognized around the United States. The Indianapolis Bar Association Paralegal Committee typically will conduct a career fair enlightening students on the services rendered by lawyers and paralegals and the benefits of having a career in our world.

Another event recently held on Law Day was a Naturalization Ceremony at Shortridge High School for Law and Public Policy where individuals were welcomed as new citizens of the United States and the State of Indiana. I have attended this ceremony, and it is an extremely moving event. There are very few people in attendance who do not shed a tear of happiness as a new citizen, as the proud parent of a new citizen, as the close friend of a new citizen or just as a bystander who is touched by the emotional impact for these people who have taken the time to study and learn about the history of the United States and the State of Indiana. The Indianapolis Bar Association is privileged to be able to say a few words to the new citizens. Our thanks to Kelly Scanlan who recently presented the remarks below to our new citizens on behalf of the Indianapolis Bar Association:

“As a representative of the Indianapolis Bar Association, it is my pleasure to extend my Association’s sincere best wishes and congratulations on this joyous occasion, and to welcome you as new citizens of the United States and the State of Indiana. The Indianapolis Bar Association is an organization of local attorneys that was formed over 100 years ago for several important reasons. The most significant reasons included to advance the profession of law, to uphold and defend the Constitution, to develop and maintain both integrity and impartiality in the administration of justice, and to apply the knowledge and experience of its members to the promotion of the public good. The members of the IndyBar have sworn to defend our Constitution, just as you have here this morning. This is a common thread and duty we all share.

To honor this occasion, the IndyBar is providing each of you with a book containing the constitutions of the United States and the State of Indiana. The rights and freedoms that we enjoy as United States citizens are precious and unparalleled. Our hope is that this gift will remind you of the blessings of liberty and justice that we enjoy every day in our lives as Americans. The first page of this book describes some of the legal services we may be able to assist you with in the future, should the need arise.

Congratulations, and on behalf of the Indianapolis Bar Association, I welcome you as citizens of this wonderful country.”

So remember Law Day as a day with significant meaning in our lives. It is also a day where non-lawyers have an incredible reason to remember the day at their naturalization ceremony. If you should ever have an hour to spare, I strongly encourage you to attend one of these ceremonies and if you do not shed a tear with these people, I will buy you lunch, but be careful, as I may cry in it.•

Law Day – May 1 of every year.

Includes a naturalization ceremony where everyone sheds a tear.

A day for all lawyers to be proud of what we do.

Promoting justice and helping people without needing a thank you.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT